{"id":938567,"date":"2019-02-19T12:05:00","date_gmt":"2019-02-19T09:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=938567"},"modified":"2019-02-19T12:05:00","modified_gmt":"2019-02-19T09:05:00","slug":"the-echr-is-renouncing-its-principles-and-bending-over-backwards-for-kovesi-tens-of-thousands-of-romanians-are-forced-to-wait-for-years-in-order-for-their-complaints-to-be-judged-by-the-echr","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/?p=938567","title":{"rendered":"THE ECHR IS RENOUNCING ITS PRINCIPLES AND BENDING OVER BACKWARDS FOR KOVESI \u2013 Tens of thousands of Romanians are forced to wait for years in order for their complaints to be judged by the ECHR, whereas the case based solely on Kovesi\u2019s whims has caught traction in only a few weeks. The Strasbourg Court sent questions to the Romanian Government, asking for explanations as to why she was revoked from the position of chief prosecutor of the National Anticorruption Department (DNA)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

THE ECHR IS RENOUNCING ITS PRINCIPLES AND BENDING OVER BACKWARDS FOR KOVESI \u2013 Tens of thousands of Romanians are forced to wait for years in order for their complaints to be judged by the ECHR, whereas the case based solely on Kovesi\u2019s whims has caught traction in only a few weeks. The Strasbourg Court sent questions to the Romanian Government, asking for explanations as to why she was revoked from the position of chief prosecutor of the National Anticorruption Department (DNA)<\/h1>\n
\n

Scris de: L.J. | \"pdf\"<\/a> | \"print\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
19 February 2019 12:05<\/div>\n
Vizualizari: 39365<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n
\n

What is currently happening at the European Court of Human Rights, under Guido Raimondi\u2019s management, is beyond anyone\u2019s comprehension. Laura Codruta Kovesi was aided in moving forward with her ECHR proceedings, within a few weeks, to an extent that surpasses the results registered by other Romanians\u2019 claims in a matter of years.<\/b> According to the ECHR website, Kovesi\u2019s legal action against the Romanian state, based on claims that several of her fundamental rights had been breached during her dismissal from the position of chief prosecutor of the DNA, has already reached the phase of preliminary questions addressed to the Romanian Government.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

It is uncertain whether the never-before-seen celerity which the ECHR has exhibited in its treatment of the case is the result of friendships and acquaintances in Brussels or Strasbourg, headlined by the former Minister of Justice, Raluca Pruna (seen in photo no. 2)<\/span>, or ECHR judge Iulia Motoc (seen in photo no. 1, together with Raimondi in the middle and Prosecutor General Augustin Lazar on the left)<\/span>, as revealed by the photos included in the article. What is certain is that anyone who has ever lodged a case before the ECHR is aware of how lengthy and complicated the proceedings are, as well as of what the meaning behind a 3-4 week deadline to send preliminary questions to the Government actually is. The manner in which Kovesi\u2019s case is unfolding, however, before the ECHR, demonstrates that a carefully laid-out plan has been set into motion, with the purposes of salvaging the former DNA chief prosecutor and securing the position of European Chief Prosecutor, despite the dozens of criminal lawsuits she faces in the country, some of which she has already been named a suspect in, and is currently under criminal investigation for deeds such as bribery, abuse of office and false testimony.<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The case of Laura Codruta Kovesi was registered by the ECHR with no. 3594\/19 and classified as a case of level 3 importance (i.e. to be treated as urgent).<\/b><\/span> The object of the case partially refers to \u2013 and we stress this matter \u2013 an alleged inability to contest her dismissal from the position of chief prosecutor of the DNA, claimed by Kovesi, as well as her statement, according to which her revocation was based on the opinions she had expressed publicly, in her official capacity.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

We indicate that, in her ECHR case, Laura Codruta Kovesi claimed that the following articles of the European Convention for Human Rights had been violated:<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

– Article 6<\/b> \u2013 the right to a fair trial;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tArticle 10<\/b> \u2013 freedom of expression;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tArticle 13<\/b> \u2013 the right to an effective remedy;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Kovesi, dismissed for tolerating and supporting the abuse within the DNA<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Those willing to see the truth for what it is can ascertain that Kovesi\u2019s right (seen in photo no. 3 with Ciolos and Mihnea Motoc, the husband of Judge Motoc)<\/b><\/span> to contest her dismissal was not prohibited. More so, an example to this effect is General Prosecutor Augustin Lazar, who contested his dismissal in court, after it had been instructed by the Minister of Justice. And since we are on the subject of Lazar, please be reminded of his \u201cperformance\u201d before the ECHR two weeks ago, when he put on a spectacle with his poor command of the French language.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

On the other hand, the argument that her revocation from the position of chief prosecutor of the DNA was the result of the opinions she had expressed on the matter of the Justice Laws reveals the consistent and blatant misrepresentation of the truth by the former DNA chief, while an entire country is aware that her revocation was based on 20 points, which included, among other things:<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tDisregard of the Romanian Constitutional Court\u2019s decisions;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tContesting the actions and authority of the Romanian Constitutional \tCourt;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tContesting the authority and actions of the Parliament;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tIntervening in other prosecutors\u2019 investigations, which were \tconducted in breach of constitutional prerogatives;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tPrioritizing cases with a significant media impact;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tAttempting to obtain convictions at any cost;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tAn increase in the number of acquittals;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tKovesi\u2019s lack of involvement in identifying and eliminating the \tprosecutors\u2019 abusive behavior;<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

– \tThe absence of measures in serious cases such as falsifying the \ttranscripts of telephone conversations.<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Consequently, according to the ECHR\u2019s public information, on January 30th<\/sup> 2019, four questions were addressed to the Romanian Government, with respect to the manner in which Mrs. Laura Codruta Kovesi was revoked from the position of chief prosecutor of the DNA. The ECHR\u2019s representatives wish to uncover if article 6 regarding the right to a fair trial is applicable in this case, as long as it does not involve a final decision of a court of law, but a decision rendered by Romania\u2019s Constitutional Court, called upon to resolve a constitutional conflict between two powers of the State, not the particular situation of Laura Codruta Kovesi.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

At the same time, the representatives of the ECHR asked whether Kovesi\u2019s revocation was a result of the public opinions which she had expressed, as well as if the former DNA chief prosecutor benefitted from legal remedies to contest the decision.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Here are the four questions addressed to the Romanian Government:<\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

1. \tIs Article 6 \u00a71 of the Convention under its civil head applicable \tin the present case (see Baka v. Hungary (GC) no. 20261\/12,23 \tJune 2016)?<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

2. \tIf so, did the applicant have access to a court for the \tdetermination of her civil rights and obligations in relation to her \tdismissal from the position of chief prosecutor of the National \tAnticorruption Prosecutor Department (DNA), in accordance with \tArticle 6 \u00a71 of the Convention?<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

3. \tIn view of the applicant\u2019s allegation that her dismissal was a \tresult of the views she had publicly expressed in her professional \tcapacity, has there been an interference with her freedom of \texpression, within the meaning of Article 10 \u00a71 of the Convention? \tIf so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in \tterms of Article 10 \u00a72?<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

4. \tDid the applicant have at her disposal an effective domestic remedy \tfor her Convention complaints, as required by Article 13 of the \tConvention?<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

* You can find here the Romanian version of this article<\/span><\/span><\/a>
<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/section>\n

\n
\n

Comentarii<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n

Adauga comentariu<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\":D\"\":lol:\"\":-)\"\";-)\"\"8)\"\":-|\"\":-*\"\":oops:\"\":sad:\"\":cry:\"\":o\"\":-?\"\":-x\"\":eek:\"\":zzz\"\":P\"\":roll:\"\":sigh:\"<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

DISCLAIMER<\/p>\n

Atentie! Postati pe propria raspundere!
Inainte de a posta, cititi aici regulamentul: Termeni legali si Conditii<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/article>\n

Source URL: https:\/\/www.luju.ro\/the-echr-is-renouncing-its-principles-and-bending-over-backwards-for-kovesi-tens-of-thousands-of-romanians-are-forced-to-wait-for-years-in-order-for-their-complaints-to-be-judged-by-the-echr-whereas-the-case-based-solely-on-kovesi-s-whims-has-caught-tract<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

THE ECHR IS RENOUNCING ITS PRINCIPLES AND BENDING OVER BACKWARDS FOR KOVESI \u2013 Tens of thousands of Romanians are forced to wait for years in order for their complaints to be judged by the ECHR, whereas the case based solely on Kovesi\u2019s whims has caught traction in only a few weeks. The Strasbourg Court sent […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":938568,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[89],"tags":[114],"class_list":["post-938567","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-romania","tag-luju-ro"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/938567","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=938567"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/938567\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/938568"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=938567"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=938567"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyse.optim.biz\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=938567"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}